PURPOSE: To determine the benefits and safety of computed tomographic (CT) fluoroscopy when compared with conventional CT for the guidance of interventional radiologic procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on 203 consecutive percutaneous interventional procedures performed with use of CT fluoroscopic guidance and 99 consecutive procedures with conventional CT guidance were obtained from a questionnaire completed by the radiologists and CT technologists who performed the procedures. The questionnaire specifically addressed radiation dose measurements to patients and personnel, total procedure time, total CT fluoroscopy time, mode of CT fluoroscopic guidance (continuous versus intermittent), success of procedure, major complications, type of procedure (biopsy, aspiration, or drainage), site of procedure, and level of operator experience. RESULTS: The median calculated patient absorbed dose per procedure and the median procedure time with CT fluoroscopy were 94% less and 32% less, respectively, than those measurements with conventional CT scanning (P <.05). An intermittent mode of image acquisition was used in 97% of the 203 cases. This resulted in personnel radiation dosimetric readings below measurable levels in all cases. CONCLUSION: As implemented at the authors' institution, use of CT fluoroscopy for the guidance of interventional radiologic procedures markedly decreased patient radiation dose and total procedure time compared with use of conventional CT guidance.
PURPOSE: To determine the benefits and safety of computed tomographic (CT) fluoroscopy when compared with conventional CT for the guidance of interventional radiologic procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on 203 consecutive percutaneous interventional procedures performed with use of CT fluoroscopic guidance and 99 consecutive procedures with conventional CT guidance were obtained from a questionnaire completed by the radiologists and CT technologists who performed the procedures. The questionnaire specifically addressed radiation dose measurements to patients and personnel, total procedure time, total CT fluoroscopy time, mode of CT fluoroscopic guidance (continuous versus intermittent), success of procedure, major complications, type of procedure (biopsy, aspiration, or drainage), site of procedure, and level of operator experience. RESULTS: The median calculated patient absorbed dose per procedure and the median procedure time with CT fluoroscopy were 94% less and 32% less, respectively, than those measurements with conventional CT scanning (P <.05). An intermittent mode of image acquisition was used in 97% of the 203 cases. This resulted in personnel radiation dosimetric readings below measurable levels in all cases. CONCLUSION: As implemented at the authors' institution, use of CT fluoroscopy for the guidance of interventional radiologic procedures markedly decreased patient radiation dose and total procedure time compared with use of conventional CT guidance.
Authors: Kwang Nam Jin; Chang Min Park; Jin Mo Goo; Hyun Ju Lee; Youkyung Lee; Jung Im Kim; So Young Choi; Hyo-Cheol Kim Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Lifeng Yu; Xin Liu; Shuai Leng; James M Kofler; Juan C Ramirez-Giraldo; Mingliang Qu; Jodie Christner; Joel G Fletcher; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: Imaging Med Date: 2009-10
Authors: Frederik F Strobl; Sophia M Haeussler; Philipp M Paprottka; Ralf-Thorsten Hoffmann; Oliver Pieske; Maximilian F Reiser; Christoph G Trumm Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 2.199